This article has been written by Cheyanne Pereira. This article explores the complexities of the Statute of Frauds. It provides a simple explanation of everything related to the Statute of Frauds, from its origin to its requirements, the various contracts covered by it, and the exceptions to the statute. It also talks about the provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code in relation to the statute, important case laws, its state-wise adoption, and so on.

Introduction

Verbal contracts are enforceable under the law in countries all over the world. Despite this, written contracts have always been favored over oral contracts. Whether it be in a tangible form or through some digital medium, written contracts provide evidence of the existence of an agreement. Apart from the evidentiary aspect, it also serves several other purposes, such as the maintenance of a record of the terms and conditions, the accuracy of events, the proof of transactions, and other relevant information. Many contracts do not require that there be a written record for a valid agreement to take place, but some contracts are exempted from this general rule and have to be written down in some form or the other.

This prerequisite for certain contracts began in England a little over three centuries back. The Statute of Frauds was introduced and enacted during the reign of King Charles II. Before the beginning of the digital age that we now live in, the statute required that the written forms of contracts be in a tangible form. However, with the creation of electronics and the development of technology, the term “written” has developed further to keep up with the changing times. This is evident in the judgments of the courts, as several countries have now allowed contracts in electronic form to be as valid as a written contract on paper. 

In the USA, as per state and federal laws, electronic signatures have been deemed to be as valid as signatures written on paper. The main intention behind the origination of this statute was to eradicate fraudulent statements and testimonies. It was enacted to ensure that a person would not try to enforce a contract covered by the statute through a false or made-up statement. The person would instead be expected to produce some proof of the existence of the agreement. After the American states adopted this statute from English law and implemented it within the frameworks of their own legislations, it has been developed and has had some additions to it to suit the individual rules of the different jurisdictions. Let us take a look at what this statute is all about and how it applies to the different contracts in the United States.

What is statute of frauds

The Statute of Frauds is a legal doctrine that necessitates that certain contracts must be in writing. Before we dive into understanding this common law doctrine in depth, we must first clear our conception of what a written contract is. While every contract has the same vital elements, such as agreement and consideration, it is not necessary that a contract be in written form. A written contract is simply a contract that outlines the duties and obligations of all the parties involved in a written format. A written contract has several benefits for its parties as compared to a verbal contract. However, this does not mean that oral contracts are not enforceable in court. Now that we have a basic understanding of the difference between an oral and a written contract, let us take a look at why the Statute of Frauds arose as a legal doctrine.

Origin of statute of frauds

The origin of the concept of the Statute of Frauds can be traced back to English law in 1677. In 1677, the English Parliament enacted the Act for Prevention of Frauds and Perjuryes. It arose in order to mitigate dishonest practices and disputes regarding verbal contracts. According to this Act, the law made it compulsory for contracts involving large amounts of money as consideration, to be in written form. This was introduced to avoid misunderstandings regarding contracts or frauds arising out of verbal agreements. The founding fathers of US law kept the original Act of 1677 as a basis for developing the framework of business agreements and adopted the same fundamental principle of avoiding disputes and frauds by stipulating that certain agreements have to be in written form. By creating a written record of these agreements, this legal doctrine widened the scope for a healthy business environment. It helped in the elimination of ambiguity in agreements and facilitated the maintenance of proof in case a dispute was brought up in court. Therefore, as the name suggests, the main purpose of this legal doctrine is to ensure the prevention of fraud as far as written contracts are concerned. 

Law governing statute of frauds in the USA

In the USA, most states have implemented this legal doctrine through the enactment of legislation. Every state, apart from its general provisions and rules regarding the Statute of Frauds, also adopts the provisions of the Statute of Frauds mentioned in the UCC, or Uniform Commercial Code. Although the rules of every state in this regard differ from one another, the types of contracts falling under the Statute of Frauds are the same. Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code contains provisions for the Statute of Frauds. Most of the states in the US, excluding Louisiana, have adopted Article 2 of the UCC. Article 2 deals with transactions involving the sale of goods. Therefore, despite every state having a number of provisions that mandate that a contract must be in written form, Article 2 of the UCC provides for a general framework for the Statute of Frauds that is followed by the states that have adopted it.

Contracts covered by statute of frauds

The provisions may be different from one jurisdiction to another, but in general, the following are the contracts covered under the Statute of Frauds :

• Anything that has been promised in relation to a marriage. For example, a prenuptial agreement between both parties. 
• Contracts that are not able to be fulfilled within a one-year period.
• Contracts that involve the sale of goods where the total amount is $500 or more than $500. This amount can differ from one state to another depending upon the regulations of that state.
• Collateral contracts are where a person promises to perform the duties of another person. This is known as a suretyship agreement, and the person taking up the responsibility on behalf of the other is known as the surety. 
• Contracts involving the sale of land. These include

1. Sale and purchase agreements.
2. Mortgages and deeds.
3. Leases.
4. Easement contracts.

• An agreement by the executor of an estate to pay off debts of that estate from his personal funds.

Let us discuss the different contracts in a bit more detail:

Contracts in relation to a marriage

Now, contracts in relation to marriages do not mean that the Statute of Frauds covers a promise to marry. A promise to marry is different and can be done verbally. For example,  person A asks person B to marry him by making a proposal. If B accepts the couple gets engaged, however, it does not mean that if one party ends the engagement the other party can legally enforce this promise in court. This provision applies to the consideration aspect of marriage or a prenuptial agreement. A prenuptial agreement is a settlement between the two parties who are about to enter into a marriage. It is a mutually agreed upon financial arrangement between two parties. It consists of an agreement made before the wedding, wherein the parties decide upon the division of assets, like any property or belongings owned either individually or jointly by both of them. The Statute of Frauds, therefore, only applies to the prenuptial aspect of a marriage, which involves all financial arrangements made in case a  divorce or separation occurs so as to ensure peaceful separation and prevent the unfair distribution of the assets.

Contracts that are not able to be fulfilled within a one-year period

Any contract, the performance of which cannot be completed within a year from the date of its formation, has to adhere to the requirements of the Statute of Frauds. The subject matter of the contract is not relevant in this case. It does not mean that the performance of the contract has to take one year, but rather that its performance cannot be completed within a year. So it does not cover contracts where the performance period is shorter than 12 months. The main agenda behind the one-year stipulation is most likely to make sure that contracts that are longer than 12 months are recorded and that there is no scope for either party to forget about its existence or the promises exchanged. It may also have been brought about as contracts with a term period longer than a year usually involve a greater sum of money than others. If the application of this rule is too rigid in nature, then there can sometimes be certain differences for people whose contracts are to begin even a day past the stipulated date. For example, if A enters into an employment contract for a year on a Thursday where the job is to begin that day, then the statute does not apply here. However, if the work period is to start from Friday, then it does apply. Therefore, while in some jurisdictions this rule is applied quite rigidly and literally, in others the courts interpret the contract as performable within a year of its formation. 

Contracts which involve the sale of goods where the total amount is $500 or more 

Contracts where the sale of goods amounts to more than $500 are not only covered under the Statute of Frauds but also fall under a separate provision under §2.201 of the UCC.

As per Section 2.201(1), in order to determine if the contract falls under the statute, the total price of the goods being sold has to be $500 or more. Therefore, if the price of all the items is added and it complies with this requirement, then the contract falls within the Statute of Frauds. In most situations, it is easy to determine if the subject matter of a contract is for the sale of goods or not. However, sometimes it may be possible that the nature of the contract is not so apparent because it is unclear whether the items in the contract qualify as goods. It may also be because the transaction is both a sales contract as well as a contract rendering services. Therefore, in these scenarios, most courts apply a test to determine if the contract will be subjected to Article 2 of the UCC. If a contract is predominantly for the sale of goods, it is then valid under the provisions of Article 2. However, if the main component of the contract is the rendering of services and the goods have just been added as a coincidence then the contract is invalid. 

An example of this can be seen in the case of National Historic Shrines Foundation v. Dali (1967). In this case, the defendant, Salvador Dali, had agreed to do a televised show where he would be making a painting of the Statue of Liberty. The painting was then going to be sold to raise funds for the National Historic Shrines Foundation( the plaintiff in this case). Salvador Dali estimated that his painting would cost at least $25,000, which he would gift to the museum. The plaintiff spent around $250 to make arrangements for Dali’s appearance to be publicized, and Dali had even announced at one of them that he would be participating to raise funds. However, later on, the defendant refused to take part in the event, as a result of which the event had to be canceled. He was sued by the plaintiff for breach of contract in a New York state court. Dali argued that no contract had been made in writing and that the agreement was verbal and prohibited by the Statute of Frauds. He stated that his painting would have been sold for at least $25,000, which was considerably more than $500. This argument was rejected by the court as the contract was for Dali’s live performance on TV, and the painting was just a part of the services that he would be rendering.

Contracts where a person promises to perform the duty of another person

This provision has been made for suretyship agreements. A surety is someone who makes a promise to the creditor that he will pay the debt on behalf of the person who has taken the money. Therefore, if the person defaults on the payment, the surety will have to pay it on his behalf. 

For example, person A has been offered admission by a prestigious Ivy League university. They have been offered a scholarship, but the scholarship amount is not enough to cover the annual tuition and the cost of room and board. A tries to apply for a student loan, and being below 18 years of age, the bank requires A to have someone to co-sign the loan as A’s surety. A, therefore, asks his grandfather B to sign the loan, and if B signs it, then he will be liable to pay on A’s behalf in case of a default on payment. So the general rules are as follows:

•  A person agrees to be the surety of another (the debtor), and the contract is not enforceable if it is not in writing. 
• Secondly, the surety’s promise to pay on behalf of the other person must be obtained in writing. This has been done for the purpose of having evidence to support the existence of the promise made between the creditor and the surety. 
• The promise made need not be only for the purpose of repayment of a loan. It can also be for the purpose of the completion of a project, for example, some construction work or plumbing. 
• The other person has to be liable. This provision is only applicable if a promise has been made on behalf of another person (the debtor or the person who owes the money).
• The promise in question has to be made to the creditor, and the creditor must have knowledge of this agreement in order to enforce it.

There is something known as the Main Purpose Rule, which has developed over the course of time. According to this rule, if the surety has undertaken the promise for the purpose of his own selfish interests, then his promise will not be valid under the Statute of Frauds. In order to understand if the surety has made the promise to further his own interests, the consideration in the contract has to be examined. If the promisor is benefiting financially from the consideration, it is then quite apparent that the contract falls within the main purpose rule and not the Statute of Frauds. 

Contracts involving the sale of land

This rule is one of the prime examples that reflect the principles of old English laws. In the old English society, land was viewed as an important and prime asset to signify wealth in the society. This rule applies to contracts involving the sale of land as well as transfers, easements, and mortgages. The Statute of Frauds applies to long-term leases and is not as commonly applied to short-term ones. For contracts to transfer and buy land, there must be a promise to pay for the interest, apart from the mere transfer of interest in land. Apart from the transfer of land, there are several other kinds of interest in land. These are:

• Lease deeds- A lease is an agreement where one party, known as the lessor, grants the rights to the use of his property to another party, known as the lessee, for a particular period of time in exchange for some consideration.
• Mortgage- This is when a person transfers their land in exchange for a loan or any other requirement. It is most commonly done to obtain loans from banks. You might have heard of people mortgaging their house as security for a loan. The parties involved are known as the mortgagor and mortgagee. 
• Easement- An easement is when a person, company, or government obtains the right to use a person’s real estate for a specific reason.

An agreement by the executor of an estate to pay off debts of that estate from his personal funds

The types of contracts covered under this provision are ones where the executor or administrator of an estate takes up personal liability to pay off a creditor of his decedent for a debt that existed before the demise of the decedent. This means that the executor makes a promise to pay off the debt from his own funds if the estate itself is not sufficient to procure the funds for the payment of the debt. The new debts incurred by the estate after the death of the decedent do not fall under this category. For example, a person A dies, and in his will, he appoints his son B as the executor of his estate. B learns that his father was in debt for a loan that he had taken. He assesses the value of the estate and realizes that it is not enough to pay off the loan, so he offers to pay it off with his personal funds instead. Therefore, once this promise made by A has been put into writing and he signs it, if he fails to make the payments, he can be sued for breach of contract.

How does statute of frauds work

The basic fundamental of the Statute of Frauds is that contracts that fall under its purview cannot be enforced unless they are written and signed by the party being charged. There are some points to be kept in mind:

• The whole contract does not have to be in written form, and a memorandum of the same is sufficient.
• Only the signature of the party against whom we are seeking enforcement of the contract and who is being charged is required.
• Noncompliance usually results in the inability to enforce, rather than invalidity.

To ensure that there are no problems related to the enforcement of a contract in relation to the Statute of Frauds, we need to keep the following points in mind:

Is the contract covered under the Statute of Frauds

The contracts mentioned above are covered by the original statute. Many states also cover other categories of contracts, for example, a lease agreement where the amount owed for the goods is more than $1000. The six original contracts provide the basis for the formation of new categories.

Does your contract satisfy the requirements of statute of frauds

If the statute applies to your particular contract, this is the next question that you should answer. As mentioned earlier, a memorandum of agreement is enough. This memorandum does not have to be one single document. Several documents may be linked together to satisfy this requirement. 

Is your contract falling within the exceptions

If your contract falls within the statute but does not comply with it, you need to check if the contract falls within the exceptions to the statute. The requirements and exceptions to the Statute of Frauds have been discussed below

Requirements under statute of frauds

The requirements under the Statute of Frauds are:

• A written memorandum of the agreement
• Signatures of both parties to ensure enforceability of the agreement
• The document should contain all the important terms of the agreement
• A rejection being made via writing has to be done within the stipulated time 

A written memorandum of the agreement 

As mentioned before, the memorandum need not be a single document. Additionally, writing does not only mean words on a piece of paper. It means any recording of this written document that may be retrieved electronically or via any other medium. Now, when we talk about the linking of several documents, it has to be clearly evident that all those documents are related to the particular agreement in question, and they all have to adhere to the other requirements under the statute, one of them being that at least one document must be signed. In some jurisdictions, it is necessary for the signed document to refer to the unsigned documents that are linked to it. In other cases, it may not be so rigid, and only the relation of the linked documents is necessary. An oral statement may be admissible in proving that a signature on a document was done to approve the contents of the other unsigned documents.

The nature of the writing in the memorandum

The content of the written document should not be complicated or difficult to understand. It should be as clear and simple as possible and must contain all the important points of the agreement. It should not be ambiguous in nature. The requirements of common law and the Uniform Civil Code are different, but usually, most courts go by the standards set by the UCC, so this difference is slowly diminishing with time. As per common law requirements, it is generally required that the memorandum clearly identify the parties involved, the nature of the transaction, and must list out the terms and conditions of the agreement. The UCC is, however, less rigid. As per §2.201(1), the only condition that must be mentioned is the quantity of the goods being sold. Besides this point, it also states that a memorandum must be written in such a way so as to indicate that an agreement has taken place between the parties.

Signature of the parties involved

It is not mandatory that the memorandum must contain the signature of the person who is pushing for the agreement to be enforced. This is because as long as the memorandum contains the signature of the party that is denying or lying about the existence of the contract, the evidence required under the statute has been satisfied. A signature is any symbol, logo, or initials that a party uses to authenticate his approval. This principle has been codified by the UCC under §1.201(37), which defines the term signed. The meaning of signature has been changed by federal and state statutes to adapt to memorandums that are in electronic forms(such as emails). The Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act is a federal statute where §7001 – 7031 refers to E-sign and stipulates the requirements for international or interstate commercial transactions. States have introduced their own statutes as well or have adopted the UETA, or the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act. The main focus of these statutes is to legalize electronic signatures and to eliminate issues related to the enforcement of agreements that have been signed electronically. An electronic signature, as defined under 15 USC §7006(5), is any sound, process, or symbol that is related to the contract or any other record and is being adopted by the person signing the record. The UETA definition under §2(8) is almost completely similar in its meaning. If a party types his name in an email to show his assent, it is considered a valid signature. 

However, if his name is automatically added to the email, for example, in the form of a header, it may still be considered a valid signature if he uses it with the clear intention of signing the memorandum. It is important to understand that just the presence of a person’s name in an email does not necessarily mean that the party has signed it. It should be clearly expressed by the party that he intended to sign the email and provide his assent to the agreement. A person may sometimes deny having signed his signature electronically and may claim forgery of his signature. This is a common phenomenon in this current age of dependence on electronics, and therefore, they require modern solutions. 

The enforceability against a party that has not signed the memorandum has been discussed under Section 2.201(2). In a situation where there is an agreement between two merchants, the requirements are:

•  Both parties must be merchants
• A written confirmation signed by one of the parties is sent to another within a reasonable time of the verbal agreement being made
• The receiving party has to give his rejection of this writing within 10 days of receiving it.

Exceptions under statute of frauds

There are several exceptions to the Statute of Frauds. If your contract falls under the provisions of the statute and you fail to comply with the requirements of the statute, your contract will become unenforceable. There are some exceptions to this rule that allow for the enforcement of a contract even if it is missing some of the necessary elements. These exceptions will only become applicable if the parties that are seeking the enforcement of the contract are able to establish the elements. 

Part performance exception

After two or more parties have made a verbal agreement, they can start to carry out their respective parts of the agreement. This performance serves as evidence of the existence of a contract between the parties. In order for the part performance exception to be applicable, it must be very apparent that the performance done has been in reference to the terms of the agreement to prove its existence. In many jurisdictions, it is mandated by the courts that the party seeking the enforcement of the oral contract must have suffered some sort of damage in performing his part of the contract and relying on the agreement. This exception mainly occurs in contracts relating to the buying and selling of land. Sometimes, courts only make this exception applicable in cases where the plaintiff is asking for equitable relief in a specific performance. Other courts allow the exception only if the plaintiff has fully carried out his end of the contract. Therefore, as per the common law provisions, part performance allows for a person to seek enforcement of an oral contract even if it does not satisfy the requirements of the Statute of Frauds. Subsections of Section §2.201 provide for a limited explanation of the part performance exception with regard to the sale of goods contracts. These two exceptions are:

• §2.201(3)(a) – where the seller has started manufacturing goods that have been specifically ordered by the buyer and are not otherwise a usual part of the stock of goods manufactured.
• §2.201(3)(c) – That covers the enforcement of contracts where payment for the goods has been made by the buyer and has been received by the seller. Therefore, if a buyer has performed his part by making the payment, he can enforce the contract to recover the money paid. If only half the work has been done by the manufacturer, then the contract is only enforceable up to the extent of work done and not beyond that.

Judicial admissions exception to the statute

Judicial admissions or admissions given under oath is another exception where, if a person accepts the existence of a contract in court proceedings or in a deposition, the contract may be enforced. This exception is, however, narrow in scope, as it is often viewed as having the potential to encourage perjury in court. The UCC recognizes the judicial admissions exception, but the scope of its enforceability is limited in nature. Section 2.201(3)(b) of the UCC allows the enforcement of a contract against a person,despite the contract not adhering to the statute, if the person against whom the contract is being enforced admits to the existence of the contract through:

• Pleading
• Testimony or otherwise in court proceedings

The admission has to be made during the course of litigation and not in other circumstances in order to be admissible. A written statement by the party may be allowed outside court proceedings, but a verbal statement cannot be allowed. If a party, during the course of an examination by an attorney, breaks down and admits to the contract’s existence, then this is considered a fair admission. 

Estoppel and promissory estoppel as an exception

Equitable estoppel can be used in some situations as the protection of reliance. It is a doctrine that prohibits a person from using a right against another person if the right is the consequence of a false or misleading action being done by the person who is trying to claim the right. It is also known as estoppel in pais. Promissory Estoppel is applicable in a circumstance where one person is led to believe that the conversation in which he has exchanged promises with another person is a legally binding contract. The person therefore puts themself in a situation where, if the other party does not perform his part, he would incur a loss or damage of some kind. The defendant is then prohibited from denying the existence of the contract. The requirements for promissory estoppel are:

• There was a promise made by the defendant which was ambiguous in nature
• The plaintiff, believing that the promise was genuine, relied on the promise of the defendant.
• The reliance of the plaintiff was reasonable and not unpredictable.
• As a result of the promise made, the plaintiff has suffered some losses.

Noncompliance with statute of frauds

As there are variations in the laws from one jurisdiction to another, there is quite a lot of confusion when it comes to the effect of noncompliance with the requirements under the Statute of Frauds. A contract that does not comply with the requirements of the Statute of Frauds is said to be void or unenforceable. Though these two terms are often used interchangeably by many courts, the general consensus on this matter is that if a contract does not comply, it does not make the contract invalid; instead, it just cannot be enforced by the party seeking its enforcement. If a contract is deemed invalid due to non-compliance, the party trying to use this statute as a defense has to specifically plead it as a defense. If the defense is allowed by the court and found to be a valid one, then the contract will not be enforced. If one of the parties has performed a part of their obligations under the contract before the contract is deemed invalid, then once it has been deemed invalid, the party that has received the performance has no right to keep it. What this means is that whatever has been done by one party will have to be returned by the other party as per the principles of restitution. This can either be some consideration in the form of money or some property. If the performance was the rendering of services, then the return of the same is usually measured on the basis of its value in the market. The court may also decide on the value according to what they feel is fair. 

Impact of statute of frauds on modifications in a contract

Contracts are always subject to modification when the negotiation process takes place between the parties. As a modified contract is a new contract, it is usually required to adhere to the general requirements of contract law. The statute of fraud is therefore applicable to the modifications in a contract unless the provisions of a particular state provide for different regulations. It does not matter if the Statute of Frauds was applicable to the old contract. If the new contract’s modifications are within the scope of the statute, the modification has to be written. 

Importance of statute of frauds 

The Statute of Frauds is important for the following reasons:

• Despite the tricky legal situations that the statute has presented in various cases in the courts, it definitely plays a pivotal role in providing transparency in the contractual process.
• By making it necessary for certain contracts to be in written form, it promotes a healthy business environment where all parties involved are thoroughly aware of the terms and conditions of the agreement.
• It helps to protect against fraud and unfair business practices and lessens the scope for confusion.
• It facilitates the contractual process in complex situations like the buying and selling of property and land. Goods and services, employment agreements, and so on.
• Protects a party from the enforceability of contracts that may put them at a disadvantage and from incurring several losses.
• Provides a guide and framework within which most business and personal agreements can operate.
• Despite the various differences from one state to another, the states that have adopted the UCC principles have a common framework within which they can operate and conduct interstate transactions. 

State-wise adoption of statute of frauds

As mentioned before in the article, the Statute of Frauds has been enacted in almost every state except Louisiana. Every state has adopted its own version of the original statute, which covers six contracts (anything that has been promised in relation to a marriage, contracts that are not able to be fulfilled within a one-year period, contracts involving the sale of goods where the total amount is $500 or more, and so on) or have some variations with respect to the types of contracts that are covered by the statute. Most states, like Hawaii, Montana, Illinois, etc., have adopted the contracts covered under §2-201 of the UCC (sale of goods) as their Statute of Frauds. Though the contracts covered are similar for the majority of the states, there are slight differences, so you should be extremely careful in making sure that your contract is not barred by the statute. In these cases, it would be advisable to consult a legal professional to help you navigate the complexities of the statute. Let us take a look at the different states and the contracts that are required to be written as per their provisions.

Alabama

In Alabama, certain contracts will be void unless they are written down. These include: 

• Anything that has been promised in relation to marriage. For example, a prenuptial agreement between both parties. 
• Contracts that are not able to be fulfilled within a one-year period.
• Contracts that involve the sale of goods where the total amount is $500 or more than $500. 
• Contracts involving the sale of land, except for leases, having a term longer than a year unless the money or a part of the money has been paid by the buyer and he is in possession of the land.
• Any arrangement, promise, or commitment to create a will.
• Any agreement to lend or postpone the repayment of money or the changing of the conditions of this agreement, except for consumer loans where the principal amount is less than $25000
• Any agreement regarding the selling or buying of securities from sources other than the national stock exchange or securities market.

Alaska

In Alaska, the following contracts have to be in writing:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

Arizona

In Arizona, written contracts are mandated for the following categories:

• Contracts that involve the sale of goods where the total amount is $500 or more than $500.
• Contracts that are not able to be fulfilled within a one-year period.
• A lease or an agreement for the sale of property for a period longer than a year.
• An agreement according to which an agent is employed to buy or sell property for compensation.
• An agreement where the terms cannot be performed by a person

Arkansas

In Arkansas, the following are the contracts that have to be written:

• Anything that has been promised in relation to a marriage.
• Contracts that are not able to be fulfilled within a one-year period.
• Contracts involving the sale of land 
• Contracts involving a lease for longer than a period of a year 
• A suretyship agreement
• An agreement by the executor of an estate to pay off debts of that estate from his personal funds
• A contract that waives any right protected by the Constitution of Arkansas or the Constitution of the United States.

California

In California, the following are the contracts that must be written:

• A prenuptial agreement
• Contracts including sales of goods over $500
• Suretyship contracts
• Contracts that cannot be completed within a year 
• Contracts for the sale of land or lease of land
• Contracts naming the executor of your will

Colorado

In Colorado, the following are the contracts that have to be written down:

• Contracts for the sale of property
• Lease agreements that are longer than a period of one year
• Contracts in relation to marriage
• Contracts for the sale of goods costing over $500
• Contracts for a lease of goods costing more than $1000
• Contracts where a person takes over another person’s debt
• Credit agreement where the amount is more than $25,000
• Contracts that cannot be completed within a year

Connecticut

In Connecticut, the following contracts have to be written:

• An agreement for a loan of more than $50,000
• A suretyship agreement
• An agreement made in relation to marriage
• An agreement for the sale or any interest in a property
• Agreements that cannot be completed within a year
• An agreement by the executor of an estate to pay off debts of that estate from his personal funds

Delaware

In Delaware, the following are the contracts that have to be written:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here (sale of goods costing $500) but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

Florida

In Florida, these are the contracts that need to be in writing:

• Real estate contracts (leases,easements,mortgages,sale of land)
• Contracts that cannot be completed in a year
• A suretyship agreement
• Leases that are for a period longer than a year
• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Healthcare guarantees for medical procedures

Georgia

In Georgia, the following are the contracts that must be written to be enforceable:

• Reviving a debt after the statute of limitations is up 
• Promise to lend someone money
• Contracts in relation to marriage
• Sale or property
• A suretyship agreement
• Contracts that cannot be completed within a year
• Sale of goods costing more than $500
• An agreement by the executor of an estate to pay off debts of that estate from his personal funds

Hawaii

In Hawaii, these are the contracts that have to be written:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

Idaho

In Idaho, these are the contracts that have to be in written form:

• Contracts where a person or a business that provides loans is loaning money or extending credit where the amount is $50,000 or more
• An agreement for the sale of property or a lease for a period longer than a year
• A suretyship agreement
• A contract that cannot be performed in a year
• An agreement made in relation to a marriage

Illinois

In Illinois, these are the contracts that have to be in writing:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned above (sale of goods) but satisfy either of the following types:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

Indiana

In Indiana, the following are the contracts that must be in writing in order to be enforceable:

• A suretyship agreement
• An agreement in relation to marriage
• An agreement for the sale of land
• An agreement that cannot be completed within a year
• A healthcare guarantee
• An agreement by the executor of an estate to pay off debts of that estate from his personal funds

Iowa

In Iowa, these are the contracts that have to be in writing:

• Suretyship agreements, including agreements made by the executor of an estate to pay off debts of that estate from his personal funds
• An agreement made in relation to marriage
• An agreement for the sale of land or leases lasting for a year
• Agreements that cannot be completed within a year

Kansas

In Kansas, the following are the contracts that must be written:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned above (sale of goods) but satisfy either of the following types:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received

Kentucky

In Kentucky, the following are the contracts that have to be in writing:

• A prenuptial agreement
• Contracts, including sales of goods over $500
• Contracts that cannot be completed within a year 
• Contracts for the sale of land or lease of land
• Contracts where a person pays off a debt of a deceased person from his own funds
• A suretyship agreement

Louisiana

In Louisiana, there are several statutes that work together to prevent the commission of fraud, such as Article 1839, Article 1847 of the Louisiana Civil Code, and the Louisiana Revised Statute of 23:731. 

• Under Article 1839, contracts regarding the transfer of property (buildings, docks, piers, timber, and so on) have to be written. 
• Under Article 1847 and the revised statute of 23:731 the following are the contracts that must be in writing:

1. Payment of the debt of a third person
2. Wage assignments
3. Payment of a debt where the time of payment is up

Maine

In Maine, the following are the contracts that must be in writing:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned above (sale of goods) but satisfy either of the following types:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received

Maryland

In Maryland, the following are the contracts that must be written in order to be enforceable:

• Sale of goods costing or exceeding $500 
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned above (sale of goods) but satisfy either of the following types:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent by one party and received by the other party within a reasonable period of time

Massachusetts

In Massachusetts, the following contracts must be in writing:

• A prenuptial agreement
• Contracts, including sales of goods over $500
• Contracts that cannot be completed within a year 
• Contracts for the sale of land or lease of land
• Contracts, including the payment of a debt from the estate of a deceased person
• A suretyship agreement

Michigan

In Michigan, the following are the contracts that have to be in writing in order to be enforceable:

• Contracts where the sale of goods is $1000 or more
• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned above (sale of goods costing $1000 or more) but satisfy either of the following conditions:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received

Minnesota

In Minnesota, the following are the contracts that have to be written:

• An agreement to pay off a debt that is a result of insolvency or bankruptcy
• A suretyship agreement
• An agreement in relation to marriage
• Contracts that cannot be completed within a year

Mississippi

In Mississippi, the following contracts have to be in writing:

• An agreement that cannot be completed within 15 months
• A suretyship agreement
• An agreement in relation to marriage
• An agreement by the executor of an estate to pay off debts of that estate from his personal funds
• Sale of land or lease extending for a period of one-year

Missouri 

In Missouri, the contracts that have to be in writing are : 

• An executor paying debts out of his own personal funds
• A suretyship agreement
• An agreement in relation to marriage
• Contracts for the sale of land
• A lease agreement lasting longer than one year
• A contract that cannot be completed within a year
• A contract for the sale of land by an agent where the agent is authorised in writing. 

Montana

In Montana, the following contracts need to be in written form:

• Contracts where the sale of goods is $500 or more
• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned above (sale of goods costing $500 or more) but satisfy either of the following conditions:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received

Nebraska

In Nebraska, the following contracts are to be in written form:

• Contracts where the sale of goods is $500 or more
• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned above (sale of goods costing $500 or more) but satisfy either of the following conditions:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received

Nevada

In Nevada, these contracts are to be in written form:

• Contracts involving a loan or granting of credit for $100,000 or more 
• Suretyship agreement where the surety promises to pay the creditor $1,000 or more (whatever the loan amount may be)
• Contracts that are in relation to a marriage
• Contracts that cannot be completed in a year
• A suretyship agreement

New Hampshire

In New Hampshire, the following contracts must be in written form:

• Contracts where the sale of goods is $500 or more
• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned above (sale of goods costing $500 or more) but satisfy either of the following conditions:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received

New Jersey

In New Jersey, contracts that have to be written are:

• Sale of land 
• Sales of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts where the performance cannot be done within a year

New Mexico

In New Mexico, the following contracts are to be written in order to be enforceable:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

New York

In New York, the following are the contracts that must be in written form:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

North Carolina

In North Carolina, the following contracts have to be in writing:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

North Dakota

In North Dakota, the following have to be in writing:

• Agreements that, by their terms, are not to be performed within a year of their making.
• Agreements that include answers to special promises to answer for the debt, default, or miscarriage of another individual except under circumstances provided in Section 22-01-05.
• Agreements that include lease, sale, or interest of a property for a period of more than one year.
• Agreements for lending of money or extensions of credit amounting to twenty-five thousand dollars or more.
• Agreements or promises relating to altering the terms of repayment or forgiveness of a debt that amounts to twenty-five thousand dollars or more.

Ohio

In Ohio, the following are to be in written format:

• An agreement that, in relation to its terms, cannot be performed within a year of its making.
• A suretyship agreement
• An agreement by an executor or administrator for paying the debts out of his personal funds.
• Agreements that are upon consideration of marriage. This is other than where there is a mutual promise to marry.
• An agreement for leasing, sale, or interest in a property.

Oklahoma

In Oklahoma, the following are the contracts that have to be in writing:

• An agreement that, in relation to its terms, cannot be performed within a year of its making.
• Agreements that are upon consideration of marriage. This is other than where there is a mutual promise to marry.
• An agreement for leasing, sale, or interest of a property for a period of more than one year.
• A suretyship agreement

Oregon

In Oregon, the following contracts have to be in writing:

• An agreement that, in relation to its terms, cannot be performed within a year of its making.
• A suretyship agreement
• An agreement by an executor or administrator for paying the debts of the testator out of the executor.
• Agreements that are upon consideration of marriage. This is other than where there is a mutual promise to marry.
• An agreement for leasing, sale, or interest of a property for a period of more than one year.
• An agreement that concerns real property made by an agent of the party that is sought to be charged unless the authority of the agent is in written format.
• An agreement that authorizes or employs an agent to sell real estate for the purposes of compensation or commission.

Pennsylvania

In Pennsylvania, the following contracts had to be in writing:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

Rhode Island

In Rhode Island, the following are the contracts that have to be written in order to be enforceable:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

South Carolina

In South Carolina, the following agreements have to be written as well as signed by an authorized party are:

• Agreements that require an executor or administrator to pay damages from their own estate.
• Agreements that involve an individual paying the debt of another.
• Agreements that are made in consideration of marriage, for instance, prenuptial agreements.
• Agreements that involve the contract or sale of land.
• Agreements that would take more than one year to perform.

South Dakota

In South Dakota, the following contacts have to be in writing:

• Agreements that, according to the terms of the contract, cannot be performed within a year of its making.
• Agreements that are upon consideration of marriage. This is other than where there is a mutual promise to marry.
• An agreement that involves the sale of real estate or an interest therein, or leases of the same for a time duration of more than one year.
• An agreement that involves a loan of money or extension of credit. This agreement could be enforced by a beneficiary for the purposes of whom the agreement was made and also includes vendors of agricultural goods, services, and products.

Tennessee

In Tennessee, these contracts have to be in writing:

• Agreements that cannot be completed in a time span of one year.
• An agreement in relation to a marriage
• When an individual makes a promise to pay the debts of another individual.
• Agreements that involve the purchase, sale, or lease of real property for a period extending more than one year. 
• Some healthcare agreements have also been covered under the contracts that have to be in writing.

Texas

In Texas, the following contracts have to be in writing:

• Agreements that cannot be completed in a time span of one year.
• When an individual makes a promise to pay the debts of another individual.
• Agreements that involve the purchase, sale, or lease of real property for a period extending more than one year. 
• Some healthcare agreements have also been covered under the contracts that have to be in writing.
• Agreements that relate to the payment of commission for oil, gas,  royalties, interests, or mineral leases.
• Loan agreements that amount to over $50,000.

Utah

In Utah, the following contracts have to be in writing:

• Agreements that cannot be completed in a time span of one year.
• When an individual makes a promise to pay the debts of another individual.
• Agreements in relation to marriage.
• Agreements where the executor of a will, with the use of his/her money, pays a debt of the estate.
• Any agreement that includes authorizing an agent or a broker to purchase or sell real estate for compensation.
• All kinds of credit agreements.
• Agreements that involve the sale of goods amounting to over $500 or more.

Vermont

In Vermont, the following contracts have to be in writing:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

4. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
5. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
6. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

Virginia

In Virginia, the following contracts have to be in writing:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

Washington

In Washington, these contracts are to be written in order to be enforceable:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more 
• Agreements that cannot be completed in a time span of one year.
• When an individual makes a promise to pay the debts of another individual.
• Agreements in relation to marriage.
• Agreements where the executor of a will, with the use of his/her money, pays a debt of the estate.
• Any agreement that includes authorizing an agent or a broker to purchase or sell real estate for compensation.
• A credit agreement signed by the creditor
• Any contract to serve as evidence of an encumbrance on real estate and deeds of trust, warranty deeds, and other such conveyances of real estate

West Virginia

In West Virginia, the following contracts have to be in writing:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

Wisconsin

In Wisconsin, these contracts have to be written to be enforceable:

• Sale of goods costing $500 or more
• Contracts that do not adhere to the first kind mentioned here but are valid in the following ways:

1. Goods that are made specifically for the buyer and cannot be sold to others
2. If a party admits in court that a contract for the sale exists but is not enforceable beyond the quantity of admitted goods
3. Payment for the goods has been made and received 

• Agreements between merchants if confirmation of the contract is sent and is received by the other party within a reasonable time

Wyoming

In Wyoming, the following contracts have to be in writing :

• Agreements that cannot be completed in a time span of one year.
• When an individual makes a promise to pay the debts of another individual.
• Agreements that are upon consideration of marriage. This is other than where there is a mutual promise to marry.
• All agreements that include the sale or lease of real estate for a period constituting more than one year.
• All promises that have been made by an executor or administrator to answer demands out of their own estates.
• When a charge is brought upon any person due to representation or assurance that concerns the character. 

Case laws related to statute of frauds 

Coan v. Orsinger (1959)

Facts of the case 

• In this case, the plaintiff Carl Coan was hired by the defendant Victor Orsinger as the resident manager of several residential apartments. Through a verbal agreement, it was stated by Victor Orsinger that Carl Coan would be given an apartment free of rent and would additionally be paid $75 a week. 
• It was also agreed that the plaintiff would be employed until his graduation from Georgetown University of Law or would have to discontinue his degree. 
• As the plaintiff had just joined law school, it was expected that the contract would be in operation for three years.
• The plaintiff accepted all the terms and terminated the lease of his previous residence. He also turned down another job offer and started working for the defendant in October of 1956.
• The defendant, however, terminated their agreement the very next month, resulting in the plaintiff filing a suit against him for breach of contract.
• The defendant moved for a summary judgment, which was allowed by the trial court, and the plaintiff appealed this.

Issues of the case

• Should the summary judgment have been allowed?
• Does the case fall under the Statute of Frauds?

Judgment of the case 

• Despite the district court’s verdict in favor of the defendant, it was found that the suit would fall within the Statute of Frauds.
• This is because there was no way in which the defendant could have completed the contract within a year, as law school takes around three years to complete. Therefore, the contract was within the scope of the statute because of this and also because the agreement was that the contract would operate while Coan was in law school.

Crabtree v. Elizabeth Arden (1953)

Facts of the case 

• In this case, the plaintiff, Mr. Crabtree, negotiated with the defendant, Elizabeth Arden Sales Corp., for a potential job as a sales manager.
• Elizabeth Arden, the president of the company, offered the plaintiff a contract with a salary of $20,000 for the first six months of employment, a salary hike of $5000 for the following six, and another hike of $5,000 for the second year of employment.
• The plaintiff replied to Elizabeth’s offer with the word “interesting” and Ms. Arden’s personal assistant was then asked to draw up a memorandum of the contract for Mr. Crabtree’s employment. 
• The contract included the details of the job being offered to the plaintiff; however, it did not explicitly mention the duration period of the contract. It did include a note with the phrase “Two years to make good.” 
• The memorandum was not signed, and the plaintiff accepted the job over a telephone call. 
• After six months of working, as promised, the plaintiff’s salary was increased by $5000. However, after the next six months, the next hike of $5000 was not issued, and despite bringing up this matter with Ms. Arden, she refused to increase the plaintiff’s salary.
• The plaintiff quit his job and filed a suit against Ms.Arden, claiming that she had breached their contract.
• The trial court awarded the plaintiff $14,000 for his troubles and held that his claim was justified. This was further affirmed by the appellate division. 
• Ms. Arden appealed with an argument that the contract for employment of two years did not exist, and even if it had existed, it would not be valid as per the Statute of Frauds. There was a memorandum, but there was no signature (of the defendant) and no mention of the employment of two years.

Issues of the case 

• The memorandum was not signed, but the payroll card was signed by Arden’s comptroller and general manager. Could both documents be linked together and found to be valid under the Statute of Frauds?
• Was the lower court’s decision correct and justified?

Judgment of the case

• It was held that the lower court’s decision was justified and that the agreement fell under the Statute of Frauds. The contract was for an employment period of two years and could not be completed in one year; therefore, it was valid under the Statute of Frauds.
• Multiple documents can be combined if they are linked to the case and can serve as evidence of the agreement.

McIntosh v. Murphy (1970)

Facts of the case 

• In this case, George Murphy (the defendant) offered a job as an assistant manager to Dick McIntosh (the plaintiff), who was a resident of Los Angeles on April 25th, 1964. 
• The job offer was made verbally, and the defendant informed the plaintiff that he would be employed as an assistant manager at his car dealership that was based in Honolulu.
• The defendant further stated that the plaintiff would begin his employment two days later, i.e., April 27th,1964. 
• The plaintiff accepted the offer and began to prepare for the job by moving some of his belongings to his new place in Honolulu. He also passed up on other job offers as well.
• After working for around two months, the plaintiff was fired by the defendant as he was not able to close deals with potential buyers at the dealership.
• The plaintiff therefore brought a suit against the defendant for having breached their verbal agreement. The jury awarded a sum of $12,103 and ruled in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant made an appeal, claiming that the Statute of Frauds stated that oral contracts that cannot be completed within a year were not enforceable, and the plaintiff’s claim was invalid.

Issues of the case 

• Was the agreement in violation of the Statute of Frauds provision that states that contracts that cannot be performed within a year have to be in writing?
• Did the doctrine of equitable estoppel apply to this case?

Judgment of the case 

• On examining the issues before the court, it was held that the provision for contracts that cannot be performed within a year did not apply to this case.
• The acceptance of the defendant’s offer by the plaintiff was examined, and the defendant put forth the argument that the agreement would not be barred by the Statute of Frauds if a weekend was counted while taking into consideration the one-year period. 
• This argument was dismissed by the trial court. The court analyzed the history of the statute and stated that it was introduced to prevent fraud. The court also stated that the main goal should be to reduce the rigidity of mechanical operation and further discussed how courts have bypassed the Statute of Frauds through the exercise of its powers of equity, specifically equitable estoppel.
• It was asserted by the court that the doctrine of equitable estoppel has been applied several times by the courts of Hawaii to put a stop to fraud resulting from the denial of enforcing verbal contracts.
• On the application of all the relevant facts to this particular case, the court held that the defendant was definitely aware that the plaintiff would be moving to Honolulu for the job, and after being fired, he was left unemployed and dependent on the defendant’s agreement.
• The lower court’s verdict was affirmed.

Mackay v. Four Rivers Packing Co. (2008)

Facts of the case 

• In this case, the plaintiff, Mr. Stuart Mackay, was offered a job by the defendant, Four Rivers Packing Co., in 1999. He was hired by the defendant to be a field man at their onion packing plant.
• His responsibility as a field man was to facilitate the contractual process between the local onion farmers and the company by obtaining deals from these farmers.
• As a result of financial issues due to legal disputes between the owners of the company, Mr. Mackay was laid off later in the year.
• Mr. Mackay was hired again in March of the following year (2000). There was a verbal agreement between him and Four Rivers that he would be working for them until his retirement.
• At that time, he was 52 years old, and he informed the company that he would be retiring at the age of 62. Mr. Mackay was fired again on March 7 of the following year. He brought a suit against Four Rivers for a breach of contract and stated that Four Rivers fired him because he had diabetes.
• Four Rivers approached the court for a summary judgment and argued that as the agreement was a verbal one, it could not be allowed as per the Statute of Frauds.
• The summary judgment was granted by the trial court, and so Mr. Mackay appealed further to the Idaho Supreme Court.

Issues of the case 

• Was the summary judgment delivered by the district court valid in this scenario?
• Was Mr. Mackay’s discrimination claim against the Four River Co. valid?
• Was the contract barred by the Statute of Frauds?

Judgment of the case 

• The judgment of the trial court was reversed by the higher court, and it was stated that the summary judgment was wrong and that Mr. Mackay’s claim that Four Rivers had breached their contract should have been allowed by the court. 
• It was held that the agreement did not violate the Statute of Frauds as Mr. Mackay could have retired within the span of one year.
• If the contract can be completed within a year, it does not matter if it was a verbal one, as it is enforceable under the statute.

Eastern Dental Corp. v. Isaac Masel Co. (1989)

Facts of the case

• In this case, the plaintiff, Eastern Dental Corporation, reached an agreement with the defendant, Isaac Masel Co., in 1973. 
• As per this agreement, Isaac Masel would sell dental hygiene products in bulk to Eastern Dental Corp. for resale.
• The parties did not sign a written contract to validate their agreement, and the transactions were carried out through invoices and statements. 
• Five years into business, the defendant sent a letter to the plaintiff informing them that they would like to end the agreement, which pushed the defendant to bring a suit against the defendant for breach of contract.
• The defendant filed for a summary judgment and argued that the contract was barred by the Statute of Frauds as the agreement was oral and not written down in any form.
• The plaintiff argued that the multiple documents, such as the invoices, statements,  and termination letter, were all related to the business relationship and could therefore satisfy the requirements of the Statute of Frauds. 

Issues of the case 

• Did both parties have to create a written agreement to adhere to the requirements of the Statute of Frauds?

Judgment of the case 

• It was held that the contract was indeed barred by the Statute of Frauds and that a written document of the agreement was necessary to adhere to the requirements of the same.
• It was held that, as per Section 2.201 of the UCC, it is essential for transactions involving goods costing $500 or more to be in writing.
• This writing would have to discuss all the relevant information, such as the names of the parties involved, approximate quantity, and so on.
• A court should be able to gauge what the terms of the written agreement are about.
• In this case, there was no writing to prove that an agreement existed, and therefore it did not satisfy the terms of the statute.
• The summary judgment was allowed for the defendant.

International Casings Group, Inc. v. Premium Standard Farms Inc. (2005)

Facts of the case 

• In this case, the plaintiff, International Casings Group, Inc., brought a suit against the defendant, Premium Standard Farms, in federal district court.
• The plaintiff was suing for the enforceability of a three-year output contract that had been made by both parties.
• As per this contract, Premium Standard Farms was selling hog casings to the International Casings headquarters in various locations (North Carolina, Milan, Missouri, and Clinton).
• The plaintiff wanted to expand their business relationship with the defendant.
• Both companies sent representatives to negotiate and form an agreement. Both sides agreed upon a set of terms that they were satisfied with, and they began to carry out the performance of their respective responsibilities.
• This agreement was verbal in nature, and the parties did not sign a memorandum for the same either.
• After some time, the defendant informed the plaintiffs that they did not want to continue with the pricing that was agreed upon by both parties and intended to bring an end to the relationship.
• The plaintiff therefore filed for a preliminary injunction against the defendant.

Issues of the case 

• Was the meeting of the interests of the parties and the performance of the responsibilities of the parties enough to form a contract?

Judgment of the case

• It was held that the agreement between the two parties and the meeting of their interests was enough to form a contract between them.
• It was further stated that the performance carried out by the two parties showed the willingness to carry out a business relationship, and therefore a written agreement was not necessary in this case.
• The court granted the preliminary injunction on behalf of the plaintiff.

Daystone LLC v. Brooke (2020)

Facts of the case

• In this case, the buyer, Brooke, entered into an agreement for the purchase of land from the seller, Daystone LLC, in October 2017.
• The parties formed a Farm and Ranch contract and Brooke paid the required consideration for the land.
• The description of the property in the contract was land situated in Erath, Texas, or land as described in Exhibit A of the contract.
• The buyer argued that the description provided for the land was not sufficient as per the requirements of the Statute of Frauds, and as a result of this, he attempted to have the contract deemed invalid.
• The seller argued that, as per the contract, he was given permission to provide for a survey within five days of the date from which the contract came into effect and that it was adequate as per the Statute of Frauds.
• The seller further argued that the buyer was well aware of what the property included, as he had visited the site multiple times.
• The seller was also able to provide several documents, such as exhibits, email exchanges between the parties, signed affidavits, and the survey.
• The buyer asked for a summary judgment. The trial court granted the summary judgment for the buyer.
• The trial court found the description to be inadequate as well, and as a result of this, it declared the contract to be void and ordered the seller to return all the money paid by the buyer.
• The plaintiff appealed further and made the argument that the survey provided and the description given were sufficient as per the Statute of Frauds.
• He also offered evidence in response to the summary judgment.

Issues of the case

• Was the description of the land provided by the seller in the agreement inadequate?
• Was the contract in violation of the Statute of Frauds?

Judgment of the Case 

• The Court of Appeals upheld the verdict of the lower court, and the summary judgment was allowed to stay.
• The court stated that the contract was indeed in violation of the Statute of Frauds.
• As per the statute, the agreement must contain at least enough information to make the land reasonably identifiable and must contain all relevant details regarding the size, boundaries, and so on.
• If the agreement and all related documents are insufficient in describing the property, then the contract is violative of the statute, and the contract will become voidable.
• Therefore, with regard to this particular case, the court found that the arguments of the buyer were valid and that the description was indeed not sufficient as per the requirements of the Statute of Frauds.

Kossick v. United Fruit Co. (1961)

Facts of the case

• In this case, the plaintiff, Mr. John Kossick, was employed by the defendant, United Fruit Co., to work on their ship.
• The plaintiff was suffering from a thyroid condition. The defendant had to pay for the maintenance of Mr. Kossick’s health.
• The defendant asked the plaintiff to obtain treatment from a public health clinic in New York City, where he would be taken care of for free. 
• The plaintiff, however, did not want to do so as he was afraid that the healthcare services provided by the clinic would not be adequate and would cause further harm.
• The plaintiff asked the defendant to provide him with funds to visit a private doctor instead, but the defendant denied this request.
• The defendant made an oral agreement to pay for any damages that may arise out of improper treatment at the public hospital in New York and insisted on the plaintiff receiving treatment from there.
• The plaintiff agreed and received treatment from the public hospital. Soon after, he claimed that he had received inadequate treatment, which caused several health issues and injuries.
• The plaintiff sued the defendant for $250,000 in federal district court.

Issues before the court

• Is the contract valid under the provisions of the Statute of Frauds?

Judgment of the court

• The district court ruled in favor of the defendant and dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint on the grounds that the agreement was void under the provisions of the Statute of Frauds in New York City as it was an oral agreement and therefore was not enforceable.
• The plaintiff appealed, and the court of appeals too reached the same decision.
• The case reached the United States Supreme Court on a writ of certiorari.
• The United States Supreme Court took into consideration whether the contract in question would be subject to the laws of New York City or maritime laws because, under maritime laws, the agreement might have been valid.
• However, after much deliberation on the matter, the Supreme Court of the United States also found that the lower court’s decision was correct and in congruence with the law, and it therefore affirmed the decision taken by it.

Leonard v. Pepsico Inc. (2000)

Facts of the case

• In this case, the defendant, Pepsico, had launched a campaign to promote its brand and asked its customers to collect points to exchange them for merchandise from the brand.
• These points were known as Pepsi points.
• To further the promotion of this campaign, the defendant created a commercial that advertised all the merchandise available and listed the required number of points needed for each item.
• One of the items that was being advertised was the Harrier Jet. The number of Pepsi points required for this was 7 million points.
• The defendant also released a catalog with all the items, but the Harrier Jet was not mentioned anywhere in the catalog.
• The plaintiff, Leonard, was interested in obtaining the Harrier jet, which at that time actually cost around 23 million dollars.
• He did not have the points, but the catalog stated that he could buy these points for ten cents each as long as at least 15 of these points were sent in with the order for the item.
• As the plaintiff could not obtain seven million Pepsi points by purchasing the products of Pepsico alone, he planned to purchase the rest of the points, which would cost him approximately $700,000.
• He sent the required 15 Pepsi points along with the money and his order for the jet.
• He sent a letter explaining that he intended to buy the rest of the points to obtain the jet.
• His letter was rejected by the defendant, and they stated that the plaintiff could only choose from the items mentioned in the catalog or the order form, and the Harrier jet was on neither of them.
• Pepsico filed a suit in the district court of New York City and sought a declaration from the court that they (Pepsico) were not required to give the plaintiff a jet as part of the campaign.
• The plaintiff filed a suit seeking specific performance against Pepsico to obtain the jet from them.
• This was then transferred to the court in New York, and the court took into consideration the actions taken by both parties.
• Pepsico then moved for summary judgment.

Issues of the case 

• Were the written documents enough to satisfy the requirements of the Statute of Frauds?
• Was the commercial by Pepsico an offer for the Harrier Jet?

Judgment of the case 

• The court held that the concept in itself was too absurd to be considered serious by a reasonable person.
• The writing in this case was not sufficient to satisfy the Statute of Frauds.
• The commercial was not an offer to purchase a Harrier Jet.
• Only the items in the catalog were up for offer, and the Harrier Jet was not included amongst these items.

Conclusion

 The main intention behind the enactment of the Statute of Frauds was to prevent the enforcement of fraudulent agreements through perjured statements. However, when it comes to an oral agreement, this doctrine can be used by a party to get out of the contract. Therefore, there have been concerns and some skepticism regarding the benefits provided by the Statute of Frauds and the possibility of its provisions being misused. 

These doubts regarding the statute led to the repeal of this doctrine in England. However, it still exists in the United States of America. The courts have tried to place focus on the flexibility of the statute by trying to ensure that its main purpose is fulfilled and that there is less potential for its abuse. An example of this is the Statute of Frauds in relation to goods received in statutory form through legislation (Uniform Civil Code § 2.201).

It is therefore very important to understand the Statute of Frauds and the effect that it could have on your contract, as it acts as a safety net against any potential legal disputes and can help you to avoid the disagreements that arise from verbal contracts. It is especially crucial for entrepreneurs and business professionals to understand the impact of the statute and what it could mean for their business deals and relationships. Additionally, if we are able to understand the requirements and exceptions of the Statute of Frauds, we are able to navigate the legal intricacies with confidence and ease.

It is equally important for attorneys and contract lawyers to understand the complexities and differences from one state to another so that they can cater to their client’s needs in the best way possible. They are also able to draft better contracts and safeguard their clients from several future disputes by maintaining the standards set by the law. It is therefore a crucial quality to possess in order to gain a client’s trust and ensure that the client enters the best possible deals and agreements available in the market. You may refer to the FAQs below for more information on the Statute of Frauds in the USA. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is parole evidence, and when is it used?

Parole evidence means any documents that can be considered for the particular case but are not in itself included in the written contract. This evidence is usually used when a dispute arises between two parties as a result of a breach of contract. The parties may both agree to the existence of the contract, but one of the parties may argue that the interpretation of the contract should also contain the verbal terms and conditions that may not be mentioned in the written contract itself. As per the parole evidence rule, this argument is deemed invalid, and the rule states that only terms mentioned in the written contract will be considered.

What does the term part performance mean, and how is it related to the Statute of Frauds?

Part performance, also known as partial performance, is an exception under the Statute of Frauds. This exception mainly occurs in contracts relating to the buying and selling of land.

As per this exception, if one of the parties to an oral contract has already performed a significant part of the contract before the other party has argued against its validity in court, then the person who has performed the work will still be eligible to receive consideration for the work done by him despite the contract being a verbal one. In many states, it is mandatory that the party seeking the enforcement of the verbal contract must have suffered some sort of loss or injury in performing his part of the contract and relying on the promise of the other party. 

When can equitable estoppel be invoked?

Equitable estoppel is also known as estoppel in pais and is a doctrine that prohibits a person from using a right against another person if the right is the consequence of a false or misleading action being done by the person who is trying to claim the right. It can be used in some situations as the protection of reliance on a person’s promise. It is found in several countries such as the USA, the UK, and several others. The provisions of this doctrine, much like the Statute of Frauds vary from one jurisdiction to another. 

How do I ensure that my contract is not unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds?

It is always best to consult a legal professional to ensure that your contract is valid under the statute and that it satisfies all the necessary requirements under it. There are several complexities when it comes to the Statute of Frauds and the laws differ from one state to 

another. Therefore, it is always best to get an expert to advise you on what needs to be done for your contract to be valid as per the provisions of the Statute of Frauds in your state.

Are there any circumstances under which an oral contract can be enforceable despite the Statute of Frauds? 

There are many exceptions to the Statute of Frauds. The exceptions under which an oral agreement can be allowed despite the Statute of Frauds are the part performance exception and the judicial admissions exception.

• Part performance exception- This is when one of the parties to an oral contract has already performed a considerable part of his duties under the contract before the other party has questioned its validity in court. If the person has performed his part then he can still receive the money for the work done by him from the other party.
• Judicial admissions exception- Judicial admissions or admissions given under oath is another exception where if a person accepts the existence of a contract in court proceedings, pleadings, testimonies, or in a deposition, the contract may be enforced. 

These are some scenarios where an oral agreement may become enforceable despite its non-adherence to the Statute of Frauds.

How is the Statute of Frauds applicable to the sale of goods?

Contracts where the sale of goods costs $500 or more are one of the contracts covered by the provisions of the Statute of Frauds. Additionally, Article 2 of the UCC deals with transactions involving the sales of goods. It provides for a framework for Statute of Frauds that is followed by the states that have adopted it.

What are the legal implications under the Statute of Frauds if I want to loan my friends or family money?

If you are thinking of lending your family or friends some money but you are concerned about the legal issues attached to it then you have a valid reason to be concerned about it. If you are lending the person money out of love and affection it is a different issue altogether and this question does not apply to you. Now if you are simply lending the money as a loan and the person intends to pay you back then you may have a lot of questions in mind regarding the manner of repayment, an interest rate, the time period within which the person must pay you, and so on. The Statute of Frauds enters this scenario as it mandates the writing down of certain contracts for them to be enforceable. For example, if you are loaning a person $5000 and as per the terms it will take them two years to pay you the money back, then the contract falls under the statute and it is mandatory that it is written down in some form or the other for it to be enforceable. Apart from having your contract written down, it is essential to consult a legal expert for further doubts.

References 

• https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/statute-of-frauds.asp 
• https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/statute_of_frauds
• https://www.csun.edu/sites/default/files/blawstatute.frauds.pdf
• https://www.upcounsel.com/statute-of-frauds
• https://nationalparalegal.edu/ApplicationStatuteFrauds.aspx